Why is the city council insisting on violating Measure B tonight?


Even though the specific language of Measure B makes null and void any “city” replacement terminal agreement made ahead of the public vote, our council members tonight are insisting on going ahead and approving this full package of airport goodies anyway.

Why is that?

This question is especially relevant when you consider that such an aggressively promotional act on their part isn’t even necessary in the first place. All the council needs to do tonight is agree upon putting the package in front of the Burbank voters for their decision first. Afterwards they can go through the formal approval steps if and when it meets the approval of the residents.

Nothing in the Measure B ordinance says that it’s merely intended to be a residential “checkoff” endorsement of a previous council action. Quite the opposite, and such contempt this council-majority has for our Burbank public that even Dave Golonski vocally objected to this clear violation of the terms and conditions — and spirit — of that old citizens referendum passed in 2001.

What kind of people are these? There’s no point to this action tonight but some need of theirs to exhibit that classic Burbank mode of vulgar political will and aggressiveness. One of Golonski’s points last fall in speaking out was that this type of cynical and aggressive behavior on the part of the council only plays into the longtime fears and suspicions of the airport critics.

It certainly proves that they were right all along. That stupid and needless airport project is being steamrolled by people who’ve never given a damn about how bad they look. Nothing’s changed in 20 years. It’s all about power, expedience, and having things their own way, no matter how foolish the plan or hamfisted the technique.

We make the decisions and not you, like the one we’re making for you tonight, and this time you get to agree with it.




Filed under Uncategorized

56 responses to “Why is the city council insisting on violating Measure B tonight?

  1. chad

    I think Gabel-Luddy just admitted the council had secret meetings about the airport that weren’t reported out.

  2. Anonymous

    I’m sure. If Jim and Gonski can agree, the you know something is afoot. Notice PufferMoron tried to silence Gordon recently when he questioned the cost of putting it on the November ballot. 180k. Remember , this Council cancelled a lousy Easter egg hunt years ago for just a few thousand ? Sick

    • semichorus

      Golonski was very much in there back when all of this airport turmoil was being sorted out. He knows how it’s supposed to work, and how the ROAR people were deeply suspicious about everything. This heavy handed action of 2016 would have only confirmed their cynicism about the insincerity of it all, and made liars of the old Golonski & Co.

      Rogers in particular is being a pushy and aggressive asshole about it– he knows Golonski’s right. There’s clearly no place for city council approval of an airport terminal. Measure B rests this decision entirely within the purview of the Burbank voter.

      There’s no dispute about this reality, and yet…?

      Hopefully the phony momentum they think they’re generating for this plan will go nowhere.

  3. Anonymous 3

    I wonder why they met on a Monday not on Tuesday?

    • Tom

      I heard Mr Nolan say tonight that Rogers is anonymous 3. When Mr Nolan said it tonight I just thought that makes tons of sense.

    • Anonymous

      Anytime the City Council wants to hide their actions and votes they prefer to do it when people are least expecting it. Long history of holding meetings of importance on nights people are not watching for them, or don’t know to show up, they like Monday’s and Thursday’s, or having meetings out of view of the camera.

    • Anonymous

      Duh! People who vote were watching the first night of the Democratic Convention!

      • Anonymous

        You people really don’t fucking pay attention. There were two meetings scheduled a month ago. One on Monday and again tonight about the airport. You still have a chance to say no to he new terminal.

        • semichorus

          No, you’re the one who doesn’t have a fucking clue.

          This city council is determined to ram that stupid terminal plan through, and nothing’s going to stop them. The majority there has been disingenuous about this from the very beginning. With some of them it was from before the beginning, like Rogers, who’s been an airport expansionist for at least the last 20 years (gift shops and modern boarding ramps oh boy!)

          For them it’s whatever works. When even Golonski marches down there and complains about it you know they’re up to no good.

          Such bad karma, too, just going into this. The manipulated election (yes, Burbank just loves its all-mail ballots, except when it doesn’t…), when they could have waited only a few short three months for the primary to occur in order to do it properly; the taxpayer funded advocacy; the complete mystery behind all the pre-planning, which was in total violation of the Brown Act; and now this blatant ignoring of the express terms and conditions of Measure B.

          Nothing good ever comes out of this behavior. Just watch and see.

          • Anonymous 3

            Jesus, what is there about more room for shops and restaurants that has your knickers so in a twist? Not to mention better TSA?

            • Ben

              TSA is fine and fast right now and as far as shops who the fuck goes to an airport to shop ? Shop means delays to try and get you to shop it does make a difference

              • semichorus

                Shops mean a bigger and more convoluted enterprise. And who needs them?

                It’s just a commuter airport, isn’t it?

                Or … is it ….?

          • Toad

            Semichorus from what I see you are and the absolute most disengenuous is Councilman Frutis. He is a liar to the core. No wonder LAPD has such a bad reputation if he is one of their finest. I voted for him how stupid do I feel now.

        • Anonymous 3

          Yes to the new terminal.

        • Anonymous

          I agree no fucking clue guy people have lives and jobs. It is not our job to figure out when this worthless council meets. The paper is worthless and the council is worthless. The city is doomed

  4. Dan

    Er violating it because they pass laws for the little people you don’t expect them to follow laws do you ?

  5. Gary

    What a pathetic bunch of supporters the airport produced tonight. Were we suppose to not notice they all sounded like parrots saying Polly wanna cracker and obvious they want a piece of the 4. Million dollar cracker while the poor public gets to pay for it. I will keep the convenient terminal we have now and not pay more for a ticket forever thank you.

  6. Burbanker

    Golonski wrote it and Golonski defends Measure B and he calls out city council for disregarding the Measure and disrespecting the voters. A deal that disrespects the voters rights is a bad deal.

  7. Anonymous

    Rest assured there is some sort of legal maneuvering for going against what Measure B called for. Most likely, if there is no expectation for anyone to file a Referendum within a very short period of time from the Council’s vote. Without a Referendum the action tonight and after the second reading, cannot be overturned with a future election. While I don’t know this for sure, that is what I believe is possible.

    (This is serious multi-million dollar business. The Airport is guaranteed eventually to get not just a 14-gate terminal, but according to this plan a future expansion can be decided by votes of the airport commissioners, if I read the conditions right. A super-majority of Burbank Airport Commissioners is worthless protection for the people of Burbank. There could have been a 27-gate terminal built in the 1990’s and that has been the goal all along. No one should rest easy and think for a minute that all that will be built is a 14-gate terminal.)

    This vote by the City Council sets up a scenario that no matter what happens when the voters of Burbank finally get to vote, all the Burbank Airport or the City has to do is go into court and get the people’s vote thrown out. There is an extremely short period of time to collect thousands of signatures to qualify a Referendum to get it on the ballot so tonight could make the November election moot.

    A successful legal action, I think called some kind of Injunction, would have to be filed quickly to prevent this Council’s vote from going forward. Then you would have to convince a judge in LA to put a stop to this manipulation of Measure B. That wouldn’t be easy and you’d still probably have to do a Referendum. Because of the short timetables, you’d probably have to do both simultaneously. This sounds a lot like “belt and suspenders” for the Airport and the City to get a huge new terminal regardless of whether the community wants it.

    • semichorus

      Yes, and if you look at the “ordinance” they’re approving, it doesn’t fit within the confines of Measure B.

      Measure B only allows an up or down vote on an “enlarged or expanded” airport terminal. That’s because it goes out of its way to state that a citizen vote is FIRST. Even though this council-approved ordinance has a kill clause in it that supposedly makes it null and void if the later vote is “no,” Measure B doesn’t pertain to citizen approval of actual ordinances, nor does it contain language that would reverse one that was already approved.

      Thus I agree with you: the only reason they would want to insist on doing it this way was to create a legal entanglement in the event of a “no” vote.

      • Ed

        And they are ENLARGING it so there is a measure B vote. I don’t think they are telling us how much they will enlarge it. Face it if they would vote for this now what makes anyone believe we can trust them in the future .

  8. 91506

    Didn’t even know there was a meeting last night but I watched it today and I am beyond disappointed I am angry.

    So Rogers brings up Golonski and what Golonski says about a violation of Measure B by the city council. Rogers says he thinks Golonski is correct but Rogers believes he knows whats best so he will go along with violating Measure B anyway ? What insane thinking Rogers showed on that issue, so I guess if it’s illegal to do something it’s ok to go ahead and do it if you believe you know what’s best ? Seems to be the Rogers idea so what’s good for the Rogers is good for the rest of us right ?

    Then there is Frutoes. I voted for the man and was he ever a liar when he was asking us for our votes. he supposedly wants the people to have a say but he forgets we had a say when we passed measure B and they are not following it correctly, Golonski says so and Rogers says he thinks so and agrees but that just doesn’t matter. Frutoes can’t even keep his lies straight and it shows.

    They have already said that we will get a new terminal no matter how we vote and they admit that they know they violate measure B but do it anyway so we should just sit back with a sigh and trust them ? That is like the cannibal saying trust me you won’t be dinner while he boils a pot of hot water with nothing in it yet.

    We need to vote Frutoes and Talamantez out of office and send them packing !!!!!

    • semichorus

      It’s going to be fun to see what happens with all of this, because if that stupid terminal idea gets the approval of the voters it’s actually dead in the water legally.

      Measure B says that any previously approved replacement terminal plan by the “city” is invalid. It has to go to the voters first.


      • Anonymous

        When it comes to Mr Frutos, I will say only this, after listening to his campaign promises and votng for him now he is dead to me.

    • Anonymous 3

      It’s true. We WILL get a new terminal, on the SW quadrant if the measure B vote comes in a no.

      Measure B has nothing to say about a new terminal on property already held by the AA.

      • semichorus

        Not so. Measure B also applies to ANY discretionary approvals regarding ANY replacement terminal, new or expanded.

        The thing with the SW Quadrant or current site is that they may not need any, which is quite different from the old legal situation that involves the proposed location. But anything extra and it’s automatically a voter issue.

        This means ANY approvals, which could include a simple AUP for a bar or a restaurant, etc.

        The council knows this, which is why they want to vest the Authority with the pre-arranged right to do anything they want if and when they need to build on their current property. But such an assurance seriously violates Measure B. It’s also being used as a poison pill to get the voters to go for the proposed plan in preference to some imagined horror elsewhere.

        The Authority won’t build on the SW anyway, because it would involve dealing with LA. So it’s all a desperate ruse.

  9. Chuck

    While the council and airport plotted in obscurity their expanded airport most of watched Bernie Sanders booed and called a traitor for suddenly supporting crooked Hillary. Guess our council is not the only group of sell out politicians around

    • semichorus

      No, you’ve been snowed by a crooked and corrupt — and interminably stupid — corporate news media.

      If you’d been listening to Bernie at all yesterday, instead of using him as a battering ram against Hillary you’d have noticed instead that he cited the term “corporate media” about 10 different times. It wasn’t complimentary, he’s sees it as the root of many of our problems, and of course the same corporate media completely ignored him about the issues.

      • Anonymous

        Sorry but Bernie said during the campaign that Hillary was not qualified to be president and now oh she is so qualified ? Sorry but the man just says what he needs to say to feather his own nest and Hillary should be in jail.

        • semichorus

          He never said she wasn’t qualified.

          I love all these Trump supporters who are suddenly so concerned about Bernie Sanders.

          • Betty

            Semichorus take a loook at the video above he says she is not qualified right on the video so don’t say he never said it wgeb its in video on this page.

      • Bryan

        The snow job is from Hillary and now she has even snowed Sanders. The democrat systen is rigged and crooked as hell.

  10. Faux Fuddy Luddy

    Tellamontez cut off that man during orals, he only went over by a few seconds . The Mayor has discretion in letting a speaker go longer. Its not like there were a ton of speakers behind him. Puffer did the same thing to Dr Gordon weeks earlier,when he was trying to get to the real cost of this rushed vote. The fix is in for sure. They held these meetings in the middle of the summer, knowing folks are out of town, etc. And yes, they cant be going thru all this trouble for a mere 14 gate terminal ….

    • semichorus

      Talamantes is a tool.

      You’ve never seen an attorney act so fast as Barlow did back when he issued a takedown notice to YouTube to get that council video of Talamantes exclaiming to everyone in the chambers: “Hey people, nepotism is what Burbank is all about!”

      The issue being discussed at the time was a community complaint about why the City of Burbank had so many relatives working for it. This incredibly moronic utterance of his was made during orals, and some alert citizen posted it online almost immediately.

      Barlow had it taken down due to “copyright violations,” which though it might apply to City of Burbank work and not federal, this particular ownership claim does not apply to the California Open Records law, which allows free use of these public materials.

      • Anonymous

        Talamontes is a horses ass and I think Luddy is the horse. I liked how Tlamantes said just ne for everything know I look here at the angry blog and he is right it really is all ed to know

    • Anonymous 3

      Everybody is out of town? What is all this traffic then?

  11. Tim

    Got the council show on my TV and I’m eating in and out burger and fries. Ok so where do they get these people who do the prayers on the council show. Yuck to the prayers tonight this lady doing the prayer called God an it. Wow I don’t think God likes getting called an it on TV so they should be carefull and hope lightning doesn’t hit their show.

  12. Eileen

    Luddy really shows a lot of phony platitudes.

  13. Ray

    Semichorus take a look at the video on this page and you will hear and see Bernie day she is not qualified. Don’t start acting like Rogers dude only he denies reality like that dude.

  14. chad

    Well, god love ya, Tim. If I had your diet I’d be dead inside of two years. Bartender, I’ll have what Anonymous had.

    • Tim

      I think the airport election thing is way expensive. They could build a new roller hockey rink with that so they sure have more money then they have been telling us about.

    • Tim

      Hey Chad in and out is like health food man compared to the stuff the healthy thinking people eat. Did you ever catch how the people who eat all healthy are really all unhealthy and all looking bad ? I mean I eat Quiznios and Subway but in and out is all good and I think it’s healthy no matter what the luggage lady and that really sick looking health lady with her garden stuff says. Get an in and out burger next week Chad and it makes the council show better.

    • Tim

      Ok so how come they said they had a council show last night on Monday and I missed it ? I mean who was suppose to know they had like a surprise show ? Now they stuck this airport with voting for President if the U.S. ? How stupid is that ? So now when we get to vote for president its president oh and don’t forget can we build a new airport too ? Duh how dumb is that when oeople are excited about who is the next president who cares about the airport that day when they vote. That is one of their top dumb ideas.

  15. Bill

    What i feel from watching them on this aurport thing is that councilman rogers was the true manchurian airport candidate an generations in Burbank will suffer from our mistake of electing hin. Like the Lady with the German accent said Rogers says he doesnt care if ge gets re-elected he plans to sell Burbank out and then move out of town. Mr Fruitos I feel will also move out of town after he does permanent damage to Burbank. Watching and listening to the two of them I feel they are both only into things for themselves and their own personal gain. In other words they both could give a shit about Burbank.

Leave a Reply- (comments take a while to appear)

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s